Feasibilty study of gemcitabine and cisplatin administered every two weeks in patients with advanced urothelial tumors and impaired renal function

Kidney and Cancer Outcomes with Standard Versus Alternative Chemotherapy Regimens for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Key Points

Many patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are deemed cisplatin-ineligible because of reduced kidney function. Options include split-dose cisplatin or carboplatin. There was no significant association between regimen type and AKI. Alternative regimens were associated with higher risk of progressive disease. There is a need to revisit cisplatin eligibility criteria and develop strategies to optimize cancer treatment for patients with CKD.

Background

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens remain the optimal first-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, many patients are deemed cisplatin-ineligible, predominantly because of reduced kidney function. Other treatment options include split-dose cisplatin, carboplatin, and non–platinum-based regimens. We compared the incidence of AKI and cancer outcomes within three chemotherapy regimens.

Methods

We conducted a single-center retrospective study of patients with mUC who received first-line chemotherapy from 2005 to 2019. We compared standard gemcitabine–cisplatin (gem-cis) with two alternative regimens: (1 ) gem-cis split-dose regimen (split) with cisplatin divided over days 1 and 8 and (2 ) combination of gemcitabine–carboplatin or single-agent gemcitabine (gem/gem-carbo). The primary outcome was Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes–defined AKI. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and progression-free survival.

Results

We identified 183 patients (98 gem-cis, 32 split, and 53 gem/gem-carbo). Median baseline eGFR in the gem/cis group was 78 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (interquartile range, 66–91), in the split group 64 (48–77), and in the gem/gem-carbo 45 (33–57). There was no significant association between regimen type and incidence of AKI when adjusted for age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, baseline eGFR, hypertension, diabetes, and visceral disease. The adjusted hazard ratios were 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 2.78; P = 0.49) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.46 to 2.07; P = 0.95) for split and gem/gem-carbo groups, respectively, versus gem-cis. Split and gem/gem-carbo regimens were associated with higher mortality and progressive disease relative to gem-cis with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.54 (95% CI, 1.02 to 2.33; P = 0.04) and 1.96 (95% CI, 1.31 to 2.95; P < 0.01), respectively. Median progression free survival was 8.1 (interquartile range, 4.6–14.8), 6.1 (4.1–9.3), and 4.4 (2.3–8.6) months in the gem-cis, split, and gem/gem-carbo groups.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in the incidence of AKI between the three regimens studied. However, standard gem-cis was associated with improved cancer outcomes. Novel regimens and kidney protective strategies are needed for patients with mUC with kidney disease.

Response to Pembrolizumab After Dose-Reduced Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine Chemotherapy Is Inferior to That After Carboplatin Plus Gemcitabine Chemotherapy in Cisplatin-Unfit Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Response to pembrolizumab after first-line chemotherapy is vital to prolonged survival in advanced, unresectable, and/or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC). However, there are sparse clinical data on host-tumor immune modification by first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. This study investigated the association between response to first-line gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) or carboplatin (GCarbo) chemotherapy and response to subsequent pembrolizumab treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter-derived database registered 454 patients diagnosed with aUC between 2008 and 2020. Of these, 108 patients who received first-line GC or GCarbo followed by second-line or later pembrolizumab were eligible for investigation and were classified into 3 groups: 48 receiving full-dose GC, 21 receiving dose-reduced GC, and 39 receiving GCarbo. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Possible factors associated with the response to pembrolizumab were evaluated using binary logistic regression methods.

RESULTS

The rate of patients undergoing surgical removal of the primary organ was higher and creatinine clearance was lower in the dose-reduced GC and GCarbo groups than in the full-dose GC groups. Pembrolizumab responders had significantly better survival benefits than nonresponders. The rate of pembrolizumab responders was much higher in first-line chemotherapy responders than in first-line chemotherapy nonresponders. In contrast to the full-dose GC and GCarbo groups, the pembrolizumab responder rate was lower, and no association was observed between response to first-line chemotherapy and response to pembrolizumab in the dose-reduced GC group.

CONCLUSION

Cisplatin and carboplatin may play an important role in the antitumor immune response, which could impact the outcome of subsequent pembrolizumab treatment. Given that the rate of response to pembrolizumab after dose-reduced GC chemotherapy was relatively low, this regimen is not recommended for cis-unfit patients with aUC. Further studies are required to understand the mechanisms responsible for the cross-reactivity of platinum and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Modification of Platinum-based Systemic Chemotherapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in Patients With Suboptimal Renal Function

BACKGROUND/AIM

Standard chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients with moderate renal dysfunction has not yet been established.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively assessed outcomes of patients with advanced UC who underwent first-line chemotherapy with full-/reduced-dose gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC-f/GC-r) or full-/reduced-dose gemcitabine plus carboplatin (G-Car-f/G-Car-r) according to renal function.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were included in this study. The objective response rate was 42%, 30%, 42%, and 27% for the GC-f, GC-r, G-Car-f, and G-Car-r groups, respectively. For the GC-r and G-Car-f groups, the median progression-free survival and the median overall survival was 4.5 vs. 7.0 months (p=0.07) and 7.5 months vs. 12.0 months (p=0.124), respectively. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently in the GC-r group than the G-Car-f group (80% vs. 38%, p=0.021).

CONCLUSION

G-Car-f could be more beneficial than GC-r for patients with advanced UC who have moderate renal dysfunction.

Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Renal Function following Radical Cystectomy: Is there a Meaningful Impact?

Objective: To evaluate the patterns of impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on renal function across the initial year following treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with radical cystectomy (RC). Methods: We reviewed the charts of 241 patients who underwent RC for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder between 2003-14 at our institution. Renal function was evaluated at multiple time points (pre-chemotherapy, pre-operatively, post-operatively, 6-12 months follow-up), and then classified by CKD staging. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine relationship between NAC and change in CKD stage. Results: Of the 241 patients who underwent RC for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, 66 (27%) received NAC and 175 (73%) did not. In multivariable analysis, NAC was significantly associated with a decrease of at least one CKD stage from baseline to post-op (p = 0.009), but not to the 6-12 months follow-up time point (p = 0.050). The loss of GFR in the NAC cohort occurs up-front with chemotherapy, but the peri-operative course is similar to those who underwent cystectomy alone. Of the 15 NAC patients (26.8%) who were Stage 3 CKD prior to chemotherapy, none progressed to a higher stage CKD. Conclusion: NAC is associated with an initial decline in GFR, which then remains stable through the first year following RC. Despite an initial insult, patients receiving NAC are not vulnerable to further deterioration. When appropriately selected, NAC does not appear to result in a clinically significant deterioration of renal function.

Gemcitabine plus split-dose cisplatin could be a promising alternative to gemcitabine plus carboplatin for cisplatin-unfit patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma

PURPOSE

Cisplatin-based chemotherapies are standard treatment regimens of advanced urothelial cell carcinoma. But a significant proportion of patients are unsuitable for cisplatin due to impaired renal function. Carboplatin-based regimens such as gemcitabine and carboplatin regimen (GCb) were applied due to less nephrotoxicity and side effects in these patients. However, it is known that clinical outcome of carboplatin-based regimens was unsatisfactory compared to cisplatin-based regimens. We compared the nephrotoxicity and response to treatment between GCb and gemcitabine plus split-dose cisplatin regimen (GC-S).

METHODS

GC-S consists of cisplatin 35 mg/m(2) given on day 1, 2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on day 1, 8 every 3 weeks. GCb consists of carboplatin (AUC 4.5) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on day 1, 8 every 3 weeks. Patient demographics, serum creatinine and calculated GFR, adverse events, and radiologic response were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with GCb (n = 22) or GC-S (n = 22) in our institution. There was no difference at deterioration of serum creatinine or GFR between GCb and GC-S (p = 0.442, p = 0.345). For patients who had GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) subgroup, similar results were produced (p = 0.292, p = 0.186). In addition, GC-S (68.4 %) showed improved response compared to GCb (31.6 %) (p = 0.023). Both treatments were well tolerated, and there were no unexpected serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on preserved renal function, favorable response, and tolerability, GC-S could be a promising alternative to GCb for cisplatin-unfit patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

[The efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic bladder urothelial carcinoma]

OBJECTIVE

Many new agents have been introduced as an alternative to standard MVAC therapy with improved efficacy and lower toxicity profile in advanced bladder carcinoma. The aim of this study is to evaluate the response rate and toxic side effects of gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) in patients with advanced/metastatic bladder carcinoma.

METHODS

Between January 2001 and April 2006, 58 patients with histologically confirmed advanced/metastatic transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) were enrolled in the study. All patients received 1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine administered via intravenous infusion of 30-60 minutes on days 1, 8 and 15, and 70 mg/m(2) cisplatin as an infusion of 60-min on day 2. All toxicities were graded using the WHO scale and the National Cancer Institute scale.

RESULTS

The average number of cycles was 4.1. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were clinically significant treatment-related side-effects. Hematologic toxicity included mainly grade 3-4 neutropenia in 56%, grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 59%, and grade 3- 4 anemia in 33% of patients. There was only one death from neutropenic sepsis. Complete response and partial response were obtained in 13 (22.4%) and 17 (29.3%) of patients, respectively, 17 (29.3%) of patients were found to have stable disease, and progression was observed in 11 patients (18.9%). Median survival for the whole group was 14.7 months (2-67).

CONCLUSIONS

GC therapy is an effective regimen owing to its high tumor response and long survival with a low incidence of toxicity in advanced or metastatic patients.

Combined chemotherapy with gemcitabine and carboplatin for metastatic urothelial carcinomas in patients with high renal insufficiency

BACKGROUND

This was a retrospective study to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a combined chemotherapeutic regimen of gemcitabine and carboplatin (GCa) in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinomas (UCs) with special regard to patients with highly impaired renal function.

METHODS

Eleven patients whose creatinine clearance was 30 ml/min or under and who had been diagnosed with metastatic UC were treated with GCa. The patient cohort comprised 4 males and 7 females, with a median age of 74 (range 67-84) years. The median follow-up was 19 (range 1-58) months.

RESULTS

Five of the 11 patients (45%) showed an objective response, with 2 achieving a clinically complete response and 3 a partial response with GCa. The grade 3/4 toxicity of the regimen was primarily hematological, including anemia (55%), neutropenia (45%), and thrombocytopenia (45%). Four patients (36%) could not complete the treatment in total. Grade 3 pneumonitis was found in one patient, and the treatment was terminated. Grade 4 febrile neutropenia occurred in the patient on hemodialysis, and the patient was forced to discontinue the chemotherapy. Another 2 patients also called off the treatment due to a pulmonary adverse event and an elevation of serum creatinine, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

GCa appears to be effective for the treatment of metastatic UCs in patients with impaired renal function, but it is necessary to pay attention to the occurrence of severe adverse events.

Systemic chemotherapy in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium and impaired renal function

Cisplatin is the backbone of chemotherapeutic regimens used in the treatment of advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. However, about 50% of patients cannot be administered cisplatin because of impaired renal functions. A review of the different approaches that have been developed in this patient population was performed through a Medline search from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2010. Twenty-six studies including 25 phase II and one randomized phase II/III studies were analyzed. All regimens, except one, were based on gemcitabine and/or carboplatin and/or paclitaxel. Only five (20%) out of 25 phase II studies actually include homogeneous patients with an impaired renal function defined by a creatinine clearance below 60 ml/min. One hundred and eight patients with a median creatinine clearance ranging from 28 to 48 ml/min received four different chemotherapy regimens including one to four drugs. The results showed the response rates to vary from 24 to 56% and survival to range from 7 to 15 months. No standard chemotherapy can be recommended from literature data. Future randomized studies will have to solve the following questions: what is the optimal definition of cisplatin eligibility? Which platinum salt should be used? Is a platinum salt necessary? How many drugs should be delivered?

Gemcitabine chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic bladder carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

• To systematically review the literature on gemcitabine chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

• The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Onlinedatabase (MEDLINE), the Excerpta Medicadatabase (EMBASE), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database(CIHNAL), the Cochrane database of randomized trials, the Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe emCiências da Saúdedatabase (LILACS), and Web of Science were searched to identify trials of gemcitabine for metastatic bladder cancer. Also searched were international guidelines on metastatic prostate cancer, trial registries, and recent systematic reviews. Data on trial design, survival, tumour response and toxicity outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.

RESULTS

• This review identified six randomized trials of combined chemotherapy with gemcitabine for the management of unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer. • One trial compared gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GCis) with methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin(MVAC) and found no difference in overall survival (OS; hazard ratio 1.09) but a better safety profile with GCis, which was suggested as the treatment of choice. • A second trial evaluated GCis against gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCarbo) and reported similar median OS (12.8 vs 9.8 months), disease progression (8.3 vs 7.3 months) and tumour response rates (66% vs 56%) for the two patient groups. • A third trial compared GCis with GCis plus paclitaxel (GCisPac) and showed no significant difference in median OS (12.3 vs 15.3 months) and response rates (44% vs 43%) but greater toxicity with GCisPac. • A fourth trial assessed GCarbo against methotrexate plus carboplatin plus vinblastine in patients unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy and found similar tumour response rates for each regime (38% vs 20%) but the triplet regime was more toxic. • Two other randomized studies compared a 2-weekly maintenance regime of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel with a 3-weelky regime given for a maximum of six cycles and found that the maintenance schedule did not confer any additional survival benefit. • In all, 53 observational studies of gemcitabine chemotherapy were identified that varied considerably in the drug combinations used and schedules. Overall response rates (17-78%) and median OS (6.4-24.0 months) were variable with no combination being clearly superior.

CONCLUSIONS

• Gemcitabine combined chemotherapy is active in the management of metastatic bladder cancer. • GCis may be considered an alternative regime to MVAC. • GCarbo should be considered for patients unfit for cisplatin-based therapy.